Comments on: Gun-Control Activist Eyed As NRA Spy
Groups Sweep Offices For Wiretaps After Magazine Reveals Alleged Double Agent
Add a Comment See all 121 Comments
- Posted by Minuteman-5 at 01:53 PM : Aug 06, 2008
-----------------------------------------------
It''s going to be funny to watch all you fun freaks shooting each other when the economy tanks and people resort to crimes against each other to survive. What a shooting gallery that will be. Most of the folks who say they''re buying guns for defense will adopt the meaning of defense that George Bush has... kill them before they kill us. - Reply to this comment
- "THE CONSTITUTION of the UNITED STATES" Posted by DaVicar2 at 01:43 PM : Aug 06, 2008
And THAT is where all your troubles began. - Reply to this comment
- "Florida and Georgia have passed new laws that allow guns at the workplace, as long as the weapons are left in the car"....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by generey at 01:53 PM : Aug 06, 2008
------------------------
Agreed, Generey... You''d think as big and mighty and full of themselves as these gun people are, they wouldn''t be so frightened of having somebody hurt them in a public restaurant. These folks are paranoid schizos. They are statistically more likely to be injured by their own gun (or a member of their family) than by someone else''s gun or weapon. - Reply to this comment
- Well, let me check . . . .
. . . oh, wait a minute! MY Constitution says that ''''the Right of the PEOPLE to Keep and Bear Arms SHALL NOT be infringed''''!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by DaVicar2 at 01:53 PM : Aug 06, 2008
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
How convenient that you left out the enire FIRST HALF OF THE SENTENCE. I guess the Bush-appointed Supreme Court didn''t feel the need to read that part of the clause either. You can''t just pick and choose what parts of the Constitution you like. Oh, I guess you can, can''t you? Just ignore reality. - Reply to this comment
- So, which one does Jesus, Lincoln, our Founding Fathers, etc. seem to fit with?
Yeah, that''''s what I thought. Class dismissed.
--------------------
Actually all three were revolutionaries in their thinking as per the status quo. Jesus claiming that he had come to fulfill the prophecies (progressive change) and preach the virtues of compassion and non-violence (as opposed to cruel Hebrew law). Lincoln''s stand against slavery (as well as states rights assumed by the Constitution) was directly in contrast to the slave-owning founding fathers. The founding fathers themselves were revolutionaries with radically progressive ideas of a system of government based "for the people, by the people" in direct conflict with the monarchial views of the day. Sounds like all your heroes are liberals by your own definitions. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by ZykraCosmos at 01:52 PM
Forget it DykieCommieMost, the Supreme court disagrees with you and confirmed that the Constitution gives the People the right to bear arms, and recently, the liberals attempt to stomp on it, was stopped cold
Since you''re into taking Constitutional rights away, I think it''s time to take away free speech, why go for Amendment 2, go for number 1, free speech ban, assault speech ban, right lib ? - Reply to this comment
- "Florida and Georgia have passed new laws that allow guns at the workplace, as long as the weapons are left in the car".
Now that is the dumbest thing I have heard today. A thief''s dream. Just about as smart as everybody going to the park for national night out. Come burglarize my home punks, were going to be at the park for at least a couple of hours! People are soooo stupid. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by ZykraCosmos at 01:50 PM
1. Did you know that the militias and minuteman were made up of the people, who took up arms against enemies ?
2. Did you also know that the Const. says the right of the "PEOPLE to keep and bear arms", it does not say the right of the militia or the right of the army or anything else, it says PEOPLE and they meant THE PEOPLE
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." -George Washington
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -James Madison, Federalist Paper No. 46.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344 - Reply to this comment
- They also took away the guns of the people...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by tcandrews62 at 01:47 PM : Aug 06, 2008
----------------------------
Another NRA myth. Plenty of Russians had guns for hunting. - Reply to this comment
- Naw...we let THE CONSTITUTION of the UNITED STATES do our talkin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by DaVicar2 at 01:43 PM : Aug 06, 2008
---------------------------
So what state militia do you belong to, DaVicar? - Reply to this comment
- I''''m so sick and tired of gun nuts coming up with this old cherry. Cars kill as well, why not ban cars - or the like. First of all you need a liscence to drive a car, you don''''t even need to read or write to buy a gun theanks to the NRA. Secondly, as I have pointed out as nauseam on these pages, cars are designed to do things other than kill - guns are not and assault weapons like that git in Wisconsin used on those kids, are only designed to kill people; not paper; not animals; PEOPLE. Thus this argument is specious at best.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by usclimey at 01:37 PM : Aug 06, 2008
DOOD; you need to invest in a dictionary. - Reply to this comment
- "Funny. The Nazis and the Soviets also infiltrated legal groups to spy on them".Posted by rafterman1
They also took away the guns of the people... - Reply to this comment
- liberal: "favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs."
conservative: "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change."
So, which one does Jesus, Lincoln, our Founding Fathers, etc. seem to fit with?
Yeah, that''s what I thought. Class dismissed. - Reply to this comment
- "Jimfinster...*** good question. No one will have the courage to answer it from their heart though. They really think guns are the answer to all that ails the planet".
Posted by cusefanjapan at 12:09 PM : Aug 06, 2008
I find it interesting that you think it is un-Christian to own guns...Do you own knifes or anything else that can be used as a weapon of defense or offense? Have you ever taken martial arts, boxing, or other physical sport that can make your body a weapon?
Do you think that it is wrong to defend yourself, family, and friends with a gun? - Reply to this comment
- As for the gun issue, if you can be responsible to operate a 2 ton vehicle capable of mowing down innocent people at 60 mph, why not a gun capable of doing about the same thing? Cars don''''t kill people, the drivers do. Just like guns don''''t kill people, the person pulling the trigger does.
Posted by phydeux2
I''m so sick and tired of gun nuts coming up with this old cherry. Cars kill as well, why not ban cars - or the like. First of all you need a liscence to drive a car, you don''t even need to read or write to buy a gun theanks to the NRA. Secondly, as I have pointed out as nauseam on these pages, cars are designed to do things other than kill - guns are not and assault weapons like that git in Wisconsin used on those kids, are only designed to kill people; not paper; not animals; PEOPLE. Thus this argument is specious at best. - Reply to this comment
- "If they''ve got one person, maybe they have more."
REALLY?
"If they''ve done this dirty trick, what else have they done?"
EXACTLY. - Reply to this comment
- Also, may I remind folks that the British have outlawed private gun ownership with the VERY limited exception of hunting rifles, yet they have a huge problem with gun violence.
Posted by phydeux2
THE UK DOES NOT HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM WITH GUN VIOLENCE. Compared to this country it doen''t have any problem with guns. In 2005 48 people were killed with guns - in 2006 the number was 56, in 2007 - I don''t remember but it was back in the 40''s somewhere. Yes this is a problem obviously - zero is a good number, however per capita it 1/100 of the rate people are killed in this country. BTW if you include murder with knives in the UK you can up the numbers by a factor of 10. This means for the statistically challenged a person is 10 times more likely to murdered by a gun in the US than by a gun OR a knife in the UK. All these stats can be found on the BBC web-site if you want to put even a LITTLE research into your idiotic pronouncements. - Reply to this comment
- What would Jesus do? Think he would own gun? Posted by jimfinster at 11:25 AM : Aug 06, 2008
"I think the question here is would he take your gun away, while keeping his?" Posted by newsjunky5 at 11:39 AM : Aug 06, 2008
Okay, you are a fool. Everyone knows that Jesus would not have a gun.
The gun lovers will say and do anything to justify having that gun. - Reply to this comment
- This is to the dummies that don"t own a gun,when some one breaks in to your house and is choking your son ,baby ,wife and you just sit there,call yourself stupid and hold your self responsible.God give you sense enough to realize that crooks don"t care and the cops cannot be every where all the time.
Posted by Rona0899
2.4% of all violent crime in this country is murder. By inference that means 97.6% does not involve shootings. If I were unlucky to be in the situation you describe - the criminal would have to have gotten past my dogs and me first. If the guy wants to use a gun, then tough luck on me, however, statistics prove he won''t want to. Also, there''s the fact that even trained hand-gun users miss a lot. The way I look at it is he''s much more likely to use his gun if I''m holding one than if I''m not, so I figure I''m ahead of the game by not having one of the *** things. - Reply to this comment
- Also, may I remind folks that the British have outlawed private gun ownership with the VERY limited exception of hunting rifles, yet they have a huge problem with gun violence. Gun laws only keep guns out of the hands of the people who would be most competent to own them and use them under legitimate circumstances. Criminals and crazies don''t care what the law says.
- Reply to this comment
